Terror Psyops: a Proven Fact

The imagery of the 100% fake killing of the French policeman was THE classic reverse psychology pixelation example where the liars try and tell the children not to watch the fake footage as it would be “too upsetting.”

March 28th, 2016.

Terror Psyops are a Proven Fact

“As reflected in a recent NATO conference in Latvia and in the Pentagon’s new “Law of War” manual, the U.S. government has come to view the control and manipulation of information as a “soft power” weapon, merging psychological operations, propaganda and public affairs under the catch phrase “strategic communications.”

“This attitude has led to treating psy-ops manipulative techniques for influencing a target population’s state of mind and surreptitiously shaping people’s perceptions as just a normal part of U.S. and NATO’s information policy.” Consortium News, September 2015.

It was stunning to listen to a public conversation between two highly respected individuals responsible for a lot of excellent work and be informed that there have never been any terror psyops or staged events and anyone who thinks there have been is an absolute fool.

This is a brief flavor.

“it makes me angry…. this crazy hypothesis….. they are doing so much damage to the truth movement…. we are being placed in the same bucket as people who are really taking it to some outside, non-existent level, (stating for example that) Sandy Hook didn’t happen.”

Charlie Hebdo -the Fake Killing of Ahmed Merabat.

On January 7th, 2015 a fake shooting was staged in the streets of Paris as part of the Charlie Hebdo “terror attack” and this is a proven fact. The video and stills are clear.evidence of fake terror.

When the masked gunman ran down the Paris street towards Ahmed Marabat the policeman inexplicably lying on the ground, he only pretended to shoot the policeman.

The video shows that the shooter actually fired a blank round and that the blank round struck the pavement away from the policeman.

The impact is visible, only one shot was fired and so there can be no doubt about the fact that the killing of the policeman was a psyop rather than a terror attack.

There is no other possible explanation for the filmed feigned shooting of the policeman in the Paris street and to suggest otherwise is to deny reality.

The video below was made to test the comparative power of the AK47 and AR15 assault rifles. In this video an AK47 is fired at close range at a concrete building block. A single round from the rifle breaks the front of the concrete block completely and penetrates through to the second layer.The bullet is fired from a distance of approximately 25 feet, a close range but a longer distance than between the “terrorist” and Ahmed Merabat in Paris.

This represents a valid experiment to determine the effects of AK47 rounds on concrete and proves that no such round was fired either into the concrete nor into Ahmed Merabat.

Here are some of the key stills form the test. Showing the weapon, ammunition and their effect on the target.

Still shows that the weapon is an AK47, the same weapon used in Paris on Janhuary 5th 2015.There are variations on the ammunition used, all AK47 rifles use 7.62mm bullets and these are of the steel jacketed and according to the video makers, a cheap and common brand.There is a complete penetration, much expulsion of dust and the block is split in half.There is a complete penetration, much expulsion of dust and the block is split in half. This is caused by a single round.There is a complete penetration, much expulsion of dust and the block is split in half.There is a complete penetration, much expulsion of dust and the block is split in half. This is caused by a single round.There is a complete penetration, much expulsion of dust and the block is split in half.There is a complete penetration, much expulsion of dust and the block is split in half. This is caused by a single round.

AR-15 vs AK-47 Masonary concrete Block Penetration Power Tet

Charlie Hebdo- a staged event?

If the event outside the Charlie Hebdo offices, the only part of the event the audience were shown, is proven to be fake then the assumption must be that the events inside were also fake, that the whole thing was simply a story because if a real massacre had taken place inside why bother to construct a faux killing in the street outside?

It would make no sense whatsoever to fake a terrorist attack in the midst of or immediate aftermath of a real terror attack in order to convince people of the reality of the first real attack.

It is the most ludicrous idea imaginable.

Or, are we supposed to believe that the French police made a deal with the terrorists that after they murdered a large segment of the Charlie Hebdo staff they would go outside, switch to blank ammunition and stage the fake killing of a French policeman in the street for the cameras and then pick up the obvious marker shoe as they left?

(Both gunman were wearing two shoes at all times, the shoe that was picked up had not been lost by the gunman, it was a stage marker placed there for them to coordinate the actions of the gunman with the view of the cameraman)

The shoe in the street where the fake shooting of Ahmed Merabat was staged, an obvious marker.The fake terrorist picks up the marker as he leaves.

Logically there is an overwhelming likelihood that given the shooting of Ahmed Merabat was inauthentic, the whole event is almost certainly a fraud.

Conclusion.

Whereas the fake killing of Ahmed Merabat on January 7th last year is a hard proven fact it cannot be stated with the same confidence that the shooting that purportedly took place inside the Charlie Hebdo offices was also fake but it is the only logical conclusion.

The suggestion that the idea of terror events being psyops is beyond the pale is a joke at this stage and those who make this suggestion are merely humiliating themselves and proving their own ignorance.

On this matter they are identical to the “leftist” drones like those of Democracy Now, who refuse to even consider the wide open evidence contradicting the official story of 911 such as the measured and proven free-fall collapse of World Trade Centre Building 7.

I remain an admirer of the work these individuals have done and would urge them to simply examine the evidence.

Like this:

Related

Post navigation

14 thoughts on “Terror Psyops: a Proven Fact”

Yes James, following on… I heard that clip and was somewhat shocked and these dear two, who recently took aim at an established voice, re/over Russia and gave the mock. Misjudged, because achieved, zilch but ill wind. The view SH or Boston or… did ‘happen’ I can’t stack with facts, but to repeat, suggesting is ‘…(they are) doing so much damage to the truth movement…’ What? Revealing and even more of a puzzle than their position on SH. Let’s see the breakdown, evidence for/against. Otherwise, at least preface with; ‘I know it looks like but…’ then, we’ve respect not a wind-up. We should all be careful in being smug and divisive. Damaging what’s a bedraggled, if at all, movement. It’s probably something about off loading our fears and frustrations. Making them public. We all make mistakes is hardly worth writing – but do.

Thanks for that Mark. I am still a fan of Sibel Edmonds and James Corbett, everyone has their blindspots although the vehemence of their views was a little unnerving. They are partly right that there are hoaxamaniacs who say everything is a hoax and like the flat earthers almost seem to have been sent to discredit. I think the widespread habit of people classifying everyone to one side as controlled opposition and everyone to the other as crazy disinfo merchants is unfortunate and I try and avoid that. I think I made one quite cogent point when I stated that their views echo identically the way the likes of Democracy Now view them, thanks for commenting.

Your presentation, James, was flawless. You showed a real carefully demonstrated result of a real AK-47 round fired into a cement block. This was and is repeatable and verifiable for anyone who has access to an AK-47. That follows the sound scientific method.

So we know the shooting was a fake. It did not take much, either, to show that, did it! It really is that easy. So how come so few see it or choose to see it. And it really does come down to choice. So now I am going to break off from the scientific process which no one seems to listen to, and examine some child psychology, where real answers are probably to be found.

A child is very suggestible and very dependent upon parents for nurturing and protection. Nature and God understood the potential predatory nature of adult humans gone wrong and so installed child protection in the child’s mind, which keep the child closely and carefully attached and bonded to the parents, his/her best chance of survival and protection.

Put another way, the child will believe anything mom and dad tell them. Their trust is blind at 3 or 4 as their own minds are no where near up to that task yet, of figuring things out for themselves. But the paradox is that if parents show trust and faith in something, like the evening news on TV or the schools they send their kids to, or the church they go to, then the child will also trust these.

Most kids never get too far beyond what they got from mom or dad. Worse, if they experience trauma, that, too, can substantially hinder further progress in development, leaving the child nearly paralyzed as regards further development. So the program they were born with, will remain functioning for the rest of their lives, seldom ever questioning anything.

So when TV news come on and says, Charlie Hebdo happened, few anywhere have any reason to doubt because they are running on the old “trust parents” routine in their instinct. The Trust routine is not capable of doubting or analyzing. It runs on autopilot. So how do we progress with a block like that?

Its very rare, actually. But a few of us seem to run across things that don’t seem to make sense and even seem to contradict certain things we learned in “trust” mode. Eventually small things grow to big things and soon we end up doubting the whole damned package that results from our “trust programming.”

But not many of us will do that. Only a few, the lucky, the brave, who dare to ignore the “trust” routine and actually let our intellect tell us what it has put together in obedience to logic and consistency, and repeated experience, that tended to contradict the “trust” results. This is the beauty of the intellect, the neo cortex that God gave us and not animals, that makes us reflect God’s image in some measure.

So from the time we are conceived, the plan was to slowly be weaned off of the “trust” stuff and let our intellects take over and verify or refute what we had by instinct. In fact, mom and dad were supposed to help us develop our sense of analytical comparison thinking that would enable us to navigate thru new experiences as society developed. But mom and dad were still running their own trust routines and never broke out of it.

So we end up, sometime in adulthood, sort of alone and against the odds in thinking what few others are thinking. It’s a perilous place to be and yet an exciting place to be. In some ways, you could compare it to 1st time sex. Its scary for some and yet, almost compelling at the same time. It might be a disappointment or it might set off a long pattern of behavior hard to stop.

So it remains for us who for whatever reason, began to question the instinctive “trust” routines, and venture off into solid logic and reason, regardless of what those might lead us into concluding about reality and what it is.

So there will not ever be a whole lot of people questioning the “trust” programming. We are among the few that have escaped that and that is our burden and our joy rolled into one. We can see the obvious fraud being put on, on TV, video and the net, too. That is our gift and our curse. But I believe it is far more a blessing than a curse.

But this is why it was said by a wise man, “broad and spacious is the road leading to destruction that everyone seems to walking on, as afterall, it is paved, smooth, lots of stop offs along the way. Real easy to travel and so convenient, too.

But narrow, cramped and difficult is the road to eternal life and wisdom. You won’t find any amenities along this route. You won’t find many walking it, either. Its lonely road. But it is a road damn well worth taking says I. Its my road of choice.

And apparently James, it would appear that you also chose the red pill to swallow. And so you write of fake psyops. My compliments to the chef/author. I’ll have a second helping, if you don’t’ mind! 😉

Many thanks for a very kind but more importantly very profound comment truth1now. I think you have explained the psychological barriers that we face in a most brilliant manner. To question is almost like leaving the womb a second time, leaving the psychological womb. We are very lucky to be on the path we are on despite the difficulties. Many thanks for a great comment and also for pointing out that we are in a privileged position and should be grateful despite the difficulties.